Trading for Starting Pitching

[Merkle's Boner]

Maybe.  Maybe not. (re: Sale and TJ)
 
I wish our pitching prospects were *READY* right now.  Like 180 ip, 3.50 era kind of ready.  Then we just blow the money on Lester, and let Clay, Kelly, and two of RDLR/Ranaudo/Barnes/Owens/Rodriguez/Johnson fill it out.  Then we could keep all the prospects and roll.

This is my problem with this whole thing. We are never going to know if these guys are in fact ready and I believe it has to factor in to how we handle prospects going forward. We have probably already missed out on the Webster/RDLR/Barnes/Workman/Ranaudo group in terms of trading them for value. I think the FO has to seriously consider moving a few of the next group Owens/EdRod/Johnson while teams will still value their potential.

 

[czar]

This is my problem with this whole thing. We are never going to know if these guys are in fact ready and I believe it has to factor in to how we handle prospects going forward. We have probably already missed out on the Webster/RDLR/Barnes/Workman/Ranaudo group in terms of trading them for value. I think the FO has to seriously consider moving a few of the next group Owens/EdRod/Johnson while teams will still value their potential.

 
There is certainly an argument to be made about young guys have lots of uncertainty/projectability (low floors, high ceilings, yadda yadda yadda), making their value sometimes more efficient as pieces to move if you want to compete now.
 
However, it is a dangerous argument to say "since this set of Red Sox prospects failed (so far), we should trade the up-and-coming ones before their value plummets, too"
 
I.e., it's a good thing Theo didn't dump Lester, Pedroia, and Ellsbury because Casey Fossum, Dernell Stenson, and Sunny Kim all sucked.

 

[OnWisc]

 
Making points that I have already made and then acting as if I didn't make them is a really odd way to make a point. Regardless, other than the oversimplification that I made for convenience sake (calling the deal Addison for Shark when there were other players involved) then of course it is relevant.  It is a proxy for the value that Beane put on Shark.  In fact it is the best information we have for how Beane (not Theo, not the Red Sox, and not some schmucks on a message board) values Shark.  People like to talk a lot about the vast overpays of deadline deals but it is actually fairly rare for the valuation of a player to change so dramatically based on the outcome of a season if they have remaining control.  
 
Let's put it this way, put yourself in Billy Beane's shoes.  He doesn't have to trade Shark.  You may think he does and Buster Olney may think it, but he is not beholden to.  In fact the A's have a chance to be a strong team again this year.  I know the Donaldson trade makes little sense, but I don't think it's an indication of a fire sale (otherwise why not target Blue Jays prospects with less service time, why sign Billy Butler).  So, here's the first indication that the A's probably will want someone that is either a very good prospect or can help the team in 2015.  I know there was a month or so when people here started putting Marrero as an equivalent to Bogaerts but that doesn't make it true.
 
 
 
This point doesn't even make sense.  Why would Theo's willingness to make a trade in reverse have any indication of how Beane values Shark?

Russell is a proxy for the value Beane put on Samardzija last July, at a time when Samardzija's value to Oakland was much greater than it is now. I have no opinion of consequence on whether Beane will/won't/should/shouldn't trade Samardzija. But Addison Russell is irrelevant as far as assessing what type of return Samardzija could/should fetch. Continuing to use Addison Russell as any sort of proxy for Samardzja's value, today, to Oakland, is assuming that Beane essentially attached no value whatsoever to having Shark onboard for the second half and playoffs in 2014.

 

[InsideTheParker]

I can't believe the White Sox would let Sale go for any price unless they fear his arm's about to fall off. Remember how excited some of you were about getting Gagne? At least some of you were excited to get Bobby Jenks. Most teams don't let pitchers go unless they have reason to expect them to falter, do they? (Unless they are about to be free agents anyway.) Sale is signed for such reasonable money with club options through 2019. He's either damaged or Williams has lost his mind.

 

[curly2]

Sale is signed for such reasonable money with club options through 2019. He's either damaged or Williams has lost his mind.

Or all this trade talk is bullshit.

 

[ivanvamp]

This is my problem with this whole thing. We are never going to know if these guys are in fact ready and I believe it has to factor in to how we handle prospects going forward. We have probably already missed out on the Webster/RDLR/Barnes/Workman/Ranaudo group in terms of trading them for value. I think the FO has to seriously consider moving a few of the next group Owens/EdRod/Johnson while teams will still value their potential.

 
Yeah this is what makes it hard.  Teams like KC or Tampa or whomever can afford to try out all these prospects and if they don't quite work out, oh well. Boston isn't really in that position.  If you trade away the young guys out of fear that you'll miss the perfect window to move them, it's entirely possible that they really were that good and they end up being terrific (and cheap!) major leaguers.  If you hold on to them hoping they become something special, it's entirely possible that they aren't quite that good and you wish you had dealt them.

 

[Rasputin]

Take this with a grain of salt up until its either officially confirmed or denied, but its being reported that Lester is signing with the Cubs. Also, Dodgers are close to acquiring Hamels. Why I mention this is, assuming its all true, who does that leave us with? I can't see us unloading the big bucks for Scherzer, so I think we need to sign Shields fast. Trade for Sale, give Shields his $100M, and sign Masterson to a bounce-back deal of 1 year/$10M. 

 
Can I just ask...why do so many people have us getting three starting pitchers, one of whom is always a pretty sucky one? Aren't we much more likely to go with one new starting pitcher than three?

 

[smastroyin]

I will admit that I don't get the Sale rumors.  Can someone explain to me what is in it for the White Sox?  Or is this just the typical "it's the off-season, someone posted on twitter, we can just assume that everyone else in baseball values our expendable assets more than they value their own core assets."

 

[FungosWithJimy]

Tough to tell who to trust with these Twitter rumors.  But I'm not sure I automatically accept Bradford or McAdam's word as gold either (no offense to either).

 

[Rasputin]

I will admit that I don't get the Sale rumors.  Can someone explain to me what is in it for the White Sox?  Or is this just the typical "it's the off-season, someone posted on twitter, we can just assume that everyone else in baseball values our expendable assets more than they value their own core assets."

 
Depening on the return, it could make sense for the White Sox, but they would have to get a whole lot back. They'd also have to intend to spend a lot in next year's free agency class of pitchers.

 

[smastroyin]

I don't think that's true, not without a lot of caveat.  The big difference between Sale and your typical 4th year pro is that Sale already signed an extension and Chicago has team options for 12.5 and 13.5 million...in 2018 and 2019.  Yes, you read that right, in 2019, when 35 year old Jon Lester and 34 year old Max Schezer are making $25 million and better but comparable 29 YO Clayton Kershaw is making $32 million, 30 YO Chris Sale will be making $13.5 million.  There is no risk of huge arbitration awards in years they won't be in contention, etc.
 
There is a chance Sale's arm will fall off, I suppose, and the ChiSox could want to take advantage of his value before then.  Other than that, there is almost no way they will get better value for dollar than Chris Sale.  And if his arm does fall out, they can buyout those two option years for $2 million so it's not like they have super huge exposure to his downside, either.  They owe him a minimum of $29 million for the rest of his contract.  That's barely more than some team will pay for a single year of a FA.
 
Anything can happen I suppose but I can't think of anything more fruitless for the White Sox than trying to parlay Chris Sale into something of more value.

 

[Rasputin]

STEAMER FIP projections

Buchholz 4.06
Workman 4.37
Kelly 4.39
RDLR 4.47
Webster 4.90

 
Is this supposed to be an answer?

 

[67WasBest]

I will admit that I don't get the Sale rumors.  Can someone explain to me what is in it for the White Sox?  Or is this just the typical "it's the off-season, someone posted on twitter, we can just assume that everyone else in baseball values our expendable assets more than they value their own core assets."

ChiSox have offensive holes in a year when offense is not availabe in free agency.
Their holes are 2B (with coming depth) SS (because Ramirez is likely dealt for Smardzija), 3B, C, RF, LF.
ChiSox have Rodon who they will add to the rotation this year, likely after the control window passes
ChiSox likely have a follow up deal for Smardzija as a backfil to Sale.  Smardzija is a Chicago boy
 
From a Sox perspective, ther may be no player more valuable to them than Sale.  By locking down one of the two top of rotations spots for the next 4 years at $6M allows them to spend more liberally on the other rotation spots.  After all, Sale turns Lester into an average $15.5m cost pitcher.  If they have to go in on Scherzer, and his cost reaches $30M, then with Sale they would average $18M. 
 
The rumor originator has named Swihart, Barnes, Renaudo and Owens, which makes no sense.  I can see reasoning for both sides, but it seems a 3rd party needs to be involved.

 

[Rasputin]

Sure...some think the Red Sox may be acquiring more than one starter b/c the ones they have project to be mediocre. This isn't really hard to understand, even if you disagree.

You think they'll only acquire one starter? I think two is more likely than three, but one seems very unlikely to me.

 
Just to refresh your memory, you were responding to this.
 

 
Can I just ask...why do so many people have us getting three starting pitchers, one of whom is always a pretty sucky one? Aren't we much more likely to go with one new starting pitcher than three?
 

 
I think they're gonna get two. Two makes sense. One makes less sense. Three makes zero sense.

 

[Corsi]

Jayson Stark ‏@jaysonst  5s6 seconds ago
#Tigers & #RedSox seem to have makings for a Porcello-Cespedes deal. But would have to be larger. #Tigers would need a starter coming back

 

[mloyko54]

Jayson Stark @jaysonst

#Tigers & #RedSox seem to have makings for a Porcello-Cespedes deal. But would have to be larger. #Tigers would need a starter coming back
 
 
Not sure if he's reporting or speculating. I wouldn't mind Porcello as long as he's the #3.

 

[foulkehampshire]

 
Jayson Stark ‏@jaysonst  5s6 seconds ago
#Tigers & #RedSox seem to have makings for a Porcello-Cespedes deal. But would have to be larger. #Tigers would need a starter coming back
 

 
I'm on board with that. Porcello is a quality SP that would very much benefit with the improved infield defense that Boston has. 

 

[67WasBest]

Huh? Weren't previous reports suggesting the Sox had no interest in dealing Cespedes for just Porcello...and now they are adding something more?

I never saw Cespedes returning Porcello, who has been significantly undervalued here.

 

[MakMan44]

So why would the Tigers need to be getting some back? I could get it if it's a Workman (maybe) and Porcello is getting extended but otherwise Cespedes for Porcello straight up is a as close to a fair trade as I've seen all offseason.

 

[flymrfreakjar]

 



Jayson Stark @jaysonst

#Tigers & #RedSox seem to have makings for a Porcello-Cespedes deal. But would have to be larger. #Tigers would need a starter coming back
 
 
Not sure if he's reporting or speculating. I wouldn't mind Porcello as long as he's the #3.




 

 
Porcello has really seemed to figure it out the past two seasons, and looks like he could be counted on to provide ~180-200 innings of a ~3.5 FIP, and that's not taking into account our IF defense which should be far superior to DET's (edit: well it kind of is...). Plus he's only 25 and is getting better. I'd be fine with him as a #2 as long as we have a very strong #1 to lead the staff.

 

[Brianish]

Huh? Weren't previous reports suggesting the Sox had no interest in dealing Cespedes for just Porcello...and now they are adding something more?

 
I took it as both sides are adding more. IE: Porcello for Cespedes is seen as reasonable, but it creates a vacancy which the Tigers need someone to fill. So they want a starter thrown in, but will add another player as well at a deeper position. 

 

[MakMan44]

I never saw Cespedes returning Porcello, who has been significantly undervalued here.

You mind explaining this a bit? Cespedes was worth more than Porcello this past season and they're both 1 year guys. In a deal like that, a hitter tends to be more valuable than a pitcher.

EDIT:And I really hope they don't throw in Webster. I don't love him but he's still got upside and to just throw him into a deal.... Ugh. Ranaudo or Workman instead please.

 

[sackamano]

Not if you have too many hitters and not enough SP ... apparently.

 

[67WasBest]

You mind explaining this a bit? Cespedes was worth more than Porcello this past season and they're both 1 year guys. In a deal like that, a hitter tends to be more valuable than a pitcher.

Porcello nets a draft pick, Cespedes does not.  Sox are going to have to offset that value imbalance and that is true for any deal with Cespedes.

 

[smastroyin]

If the rumor is true, the Tigers have to want someone they can slot in this year, because they have a bunch of AA arms that are equivalent to guys like Renaudo, if a year behind.  So maybe Cespedes plus Workman for Porcello and an A ball OF or something.

 

[67WasBest]

I like Cespedes and Webster as the right package.  Webster will benefit from that big park more than the other similar starters and he;s more ready than Renaudo who would also benefit from that park

 

[MakMan44]

Porcello nets a draft pick, Cespedes does not.  Sox are going to have to offset that value imbalance and that is true for any deal with Cespedes.

Forgot about that detail. That's true. I don't think it's worth someone amazing but a Barnes/Workman/Ranaudo type makes sense.

 

[Gash Prex]

IMO, we aren't dealing from a position of strength because : 1) our glut of OF; 2) Cespedes is a Free Agent next year; and 3) Cespedes numbers beyond the HR aren't terribly exciting. I think Porcello is a decent return.  

 

[czar]

Jayson Stark @jaysonst

#Tigers & #RedSox seem to have makings for a Porcello-Cespedes deal. But would have to be larger. #Tigers would need a starter coming back
 
 
Not sure if he's reporting or speculating. I wouldn't mind Porcello as long as he's the #3.

Listened to Stark on Olney's podcast on the way in to work.

His feeling is that Tigers don't want to open up more than one hole in the rotation for young/unproven guy. Ergo, if they move either Price or Porcello, he opined they'd need some sort of SP piece back. Given what he said re: the young players and Dombrowski's thinking, not sure a guy like Webster or Ranaudo going back is what he's looking for, although it may open the door up for a three-way trade.

 

[OnWisc]

 
Porcello has really seemed to figure it out the past two seasons, and looks like he could be counted on to provide ~180-200 innings of a ~3.5 FIP, and that's not taking into account our IF defense which should be far superior to DET's (edit: well it kind of is...). Plus he's only 25 and is getting better. I'd be fine with him as a #2 as long as we have a very strong #1 to lead the staff.

I wouldn't necessarily say he's getting better. He fastball velocity dropped about 1 mph between 2013 and 2014 and he seems to have lost the ability to punch lefties out with his change. If the BABIP gods smile, he could be a solid addition.

 

[Merkle's Boner]

You mind explaining this a bit? Cespedes was worth more than Porcello this past season and they're both 1 year guys. In a deal like that, a hitter tends to be more valuable than a pitcher.
EDIT:And I really hope they don't throw in Webster. I don't love him but he's still got upside and to just throw him into a deal.... Ugh. Ranaudo or Workman instead please.

Porcello is only 14 months older than Webster, and 9 months older than Ranuado. He's surprisingly young.

 

[czar]

I wouldn't necessarily say he's getting better. He fastball velocity dropped about 1 mph between 2013 and 2014 and he seems to have lost the ability to punch lefties out with his change. If the BABIP gods smile, he could be a solid addition.

SwStr% still above his career avg and BB% rate career low, though, so I wouldn't read too much into a little FB regression.

I don't think anyone should think he's a savior, but with a sub-4.00 SIERA in the AL, he should be a plus value (3 win?) mid-rotation guy for the Tigers (or whomever).

 

[MakMan44]

Porcello is only 14 months older than Webster, and 9 months older than Ranuado. He's surprisingly young.

I'd love for the Sox to acquire and extend him.
 
Dave Cameron said in his chat today that the Sox should go for Porcello over Kennedy FWIW.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

I wouldn't necessarily say he's getting better. He fastball velocity dropped about 1 mph between 2013 and 2014 and he seems to have lost the ability to punch lefties out with his change. If the BABIP gods smile, he could be a solid addition.

 
Interesting FG piece says that the increased contact rate on the changeup is a feature, not a bug. Which underlines that with Porcello it's all about the infield defense, making us a mixed-bag kind of fit as currently constituted (though if and when Marrero displaces Bogaerts at SS, that would unmix the bag considerably).

 

[nighthob]

Porcello is only 14 months older than Webster, and 9 months older than Ranuado. He's surprisingly young.

I have a friend that's a Tigers' blogger who swears that Porcello will eventually be the worst pitcher in the Hall of Fame given his age and the likelihood that he's going to finish his career around 300 wins.

Jayson Stark @jaysonst

#Tigers & #RedSox seem to have makings for a Porcello-Cespedes deal. But would have to be larger. #Tigers would need a starter coming back
 
 
Not sure if he's reporting or speculating. I wouldn't mind Porcello as long as he's the #3.

Don't they already have four rotation spots locked up without Porcello (assuming they can re-sign Scherzer)? I guess this makes sense if they're closing the book on Scherzer, but who are they including to balance the books? I'm not terribly enthused by their AA arms. Javy Betancourt? He's about the only lottery ticket I can think of that I can work up more than a little interest in.

 

[Rasputin]

Don't they already have four rotation spots locked up without Porcello (assuming they can re-sign Scherzer)? I guess this makes sense if they're closing the book on Scherzer, but who are they including to balance the books? I'm not terribly enthused by their AA arms. Javy Betancourt? He's about the only lottery ticket I can think of that I can work up more than a little interest in.

 
Are people assuming they're going to re sign Scherzer?  'Cause I've been assuming they can't.

 

[ivanvamp]

Two scenarios:
 
1.  Sign Lester
2.  Trade for Sale
 
In the first scenario, you sign Lester for, say, 6/150 ($25m a year).  But you keep your young studs.  In the second scenario, you trade Bogaerts/Owens/Marrero for Sale, whose low salary enables the Sox to spend more elsewhere.  Plus, Sale is simply better than Lester, by a lot.  So which would you all prefer:
 
In:  Lester
Out:  $25m a year for 6 years
 
or
 
In:  Sale
Out:  Bogaerts, Owens, Marrero, $12.6m a year for 5 years

 

[nighthob]

Are people assuming they're going to re sign Scherzer?  'Cause I've been assuming they can't.

Well, I know Ilitch wants to win before he passes on, and they already went to $24 million on Scherzer. If they're losing Porcello and his salary I'm not seeing what the issue is with upping the offer to Scherzer. I think Price next winter is actually a bigger problem. I'd be more inclined to include the cost controlled arms in a deal for Porcello and Price, but that's probably beyond the pale for the Tigers given Verlander's decline.

 

[Rasputin]

Two scenarios:
 
1.  Sign Lester
2.  Trade for Sale
 
In the first scenario, you sign Lester for, say, 6/150 ($25m a year).  But you keep your young studs.  In the second scenario, you trade Bogaerts/Owens/Marrero for Sale, whose low salary enables the Sox to spend more elsewhere.  Plus, Sale is simply better than Lester, by a lot.  So which would you all prefer:
 
In:  Lester
Out:  $25m a year for 6 years
 
or
 
In:  Sale
Out:  Bogaerts, Owens, Marrero, $12.6m a year for 5 years

 
The only way giving up Bogaerts for Sale would make more sense than just signing Lester is if the Sox kept Marrero, Bogaerts was a bust, and Marrero isn't. I mean, Sale is better than Lester, but it's not like he's ten times as good. If they were facing each other in a game with all the rest of both teams being equal, Sale's team would win maybe 55% of the time, not 75% of the time.

 

[ivanvamp]

 
The only way giving up Bogaerts for Sale would make more sense than just signing Lester is if the Sox kept Marrero, Bogaerts was a bust, and Marrero isn't. I mean, Sale is better than Lester, but it's not like he's ten times as good. If they were facing each other in a game with all the rest of both teams being equal, Sale's team would win maybe 55% of the time, not 75% of the time.

 
I'd rather have Lester and the other players, even though it's a larger outlay of cash.  But Sale is significantly better (6.9, 6.6 bWAR compared to 3.0, 4.6 bWAR for Lester), and the money saved could mean the Sox get *another* significant free agent as well.  
 
It's not an easy call.  
 
That said, I'd still prefer Lester and the kids.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

Two scenarios:
 
1.  Sign Lester
2.  Trade for Sale
 
In the first scenario, you sign Lester for, say, 6/150 ($25m a year).  But you keep your young studs.  In the second scenario, you trade Bogaerts/Owens/Marrero for Sale, whose low salary enables the Sox to spend more elsewhere.  Plus, Sale is simply better than Lester, by a lot.  So which would you all prefer:
 
In:  Lester
Out:  $25m a year for 6 years
 
or
 
In:  Sale
Out:  Bogaerts, Owens, Marrero, $12.6m a year for 5 years

 
There is no possible trade scenario that includes both Bogaerts and Marrero from our end. At that point our ML-ready SS depth would be Hanley Ramirez and Brock Holt. I'm not as down on using Hanley at SS as some of us are, but even I think that's a bad idea.

 

[67WasBest]

 
There is no possible trade scenario that includes both Bogaerts and Marrero from our end. At that point our ML-ready SS depth would be Hanley Ramirez and Brock Holt. I'm not as down on using Hanley at SS as some of us are, but even I think that's a bad idea.

Agree completely.  I have no issue with Hanley at SS, but I do have issue with zero depth.  I could see a Sale and A Ramirez package fitting here, although highly unlikely.  .

 

[grimshaw]

I'm going to have to look it up, but can anyone remember a deal involving 2 top 15 prospects (I'm still counting Bogaerts as one, and Henry has been ranked between 11 and 20) for a pitcher?
 
I guess I just can't see it happening for anyone short of an MVP type player.

 

[RedOctober3829]

MLB Network Radio ‏@MLBNetworkRadio 8s9 seconds ago
Cherington: the Hanley signing does increase the likelihood of making a trade. We've had a lot of calls on the OF since then. #RedSox
 

 

[RedOctober3829]

MLB Network Radio ‏@MLBNetworkRadio 35s36 seconds ago
Cherington: I wouldn't rule out adding 2 starters, we don't know the cost/names, but we wouldn't rule it out. #RedSox
 

 

[soxhop411]

“@MLBNetworkRadio: Cherington: we’re going to add a catcher at some point & I’m sure we’ll do something with the bullpen but rotation is the priority #RedSox”

 

[RedOctober3829]

MLB Network Radio ‏@MLBNetworkRadio 34s35 seconds ago
Cherington: we're going to add a catcher at some point & I'm sure we'll do something with the bullpen but rotation is the priority #RedSox
 

 

[Manramsclan]

The Dodgers just traded P Matt McGill for OF Chris Heisey.
 
This move is particularly interesting given LA's current glut of OF: Kemp, Puig,Crawford, Eithier and Joc Pederson, and now Heisey.
 
Any one of those guys could be moved in varying scenarios with different degree of value ascribed to each with regard to talent and contractual obligation.
 
One would think that this could slow the market for Cespedes' services seeing as a few of these guys would be more desirable, particularly Puig and Pederson who are still under team control. While I would suspect Friedman would be holding onto these two assets, the mere possibility that he would not might slow down Cespedes' market. If I were going to trade a valuable pitcher for Cespedes' and a prospect, I might also be inclined to trade that valuable pitcher straight up for one of those two. Movement on the Dodgers front with regards to their OF, certainly bears watching as it impacts the trade market in terms of the Red Sox OF surplus as well.

 

[Jed Zeppelin]

The Dodgers just traded P Matt McGill for OF Chris Heisey.
 
This move is particularly interesting given LA's current glut of OF: Kemp, Puig,Crawford, Eithier and Joc Pederson, and now Heisey.
 
Any one of those guys could be moved in varying scenarios with different degree of value ascribed to each with regard to talent and contractual obligation.
 
One would think that this could slow the market for Cespedes' services seeing as a few of these guys would be more desirable, particularly Puig and Pederson who are still under team control. While I would suspect Friedman would be holding onto these two assets, the mere possibility that he would not might slow down Cespedes' market. If I were going to trade a valuable pitcher for Cespedes' and a prospect, I might also be inclined to trade that valuable pitcher straight up for one of those two. Movement on the Dodgers front with regards to their OF, certainly bears watching as it impacts the trade market in terms of the Red Sox OF surplus as well.

 
Because of the bolded, I'm not sure how much overlap there is here. For Cespedes we're most likely looking at a SP who is good but only under control through next season. For Puig and Pederson the Dodgers would aim higher than those short term mid-rotation guys, and any move involving the Kemp/Crawford/Ethier trio are inherently complicated because of the massive money still owed to them.

 

[TOleary25]

The Dodgers just traded P Matt McGill for OF Chris Heisey.
 
This move is particularly interesting given LA's current glut of OF: Kemp, Puig,Crawford, Eithier and Joc Pederson, and now Heisey.
 
Any one of those guys could be moved in varying scenarios with different degree of value ascribed to each with regard to talent and contractual obligation.
 
One would think that this could slow the market for Cespedes' services seeing as a few of these guys would be more desirable, particularly Puig and Pederson who are still under team control. While I would suspect Friedman would be holding onto these two assets, the mere possibility that he would not might slow down Cespedes' market. If I were going to trade a valuable pitcher for Cespedes' and a prospect, I might also be inclined to trade that valuable pitcher straight up for one of those two. Movement on the Dodgers front with regards to their OF, certainly bears watching as it impacts the trade market in terms of the Red Sox OF surplus as well.

 
 
Puig and Pederson are in a totally different category than Cespedes. Puig for any of these rumored pitchers (Cueto, Shark, Zimmermann, etc) on the trade market is not a good enough return for the Dodgers and Pederson probably isn't enough for the team trading the starter. I can see a heavily subsidized Kemp or Ethier impacting the Cespedes trade market, but not the other two. There seems to be plenty of teams looking for a power hitter so I'm not worried about Cespedes value being diminished to the point where the Sox wont move him.